IRC log of silver on 2021-04-16

Timestamps are in UTC.

17:55:10 [RRSAgent]
RRSAgent has joined #silver
17:55:10 [RRSAgent]
logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/04/16-silver-irc
17:55:12 [Zakim]
RRSAgent, make logs Public
17:55:13 [Zakim]
Meeting: Silver Task Force & Community Group
17:55:33 [jeanne]
Meeting: Silver Task Force & Community Group
17:55:33 [jeanne]
present:
17:55:33 [jeanne]
chair: Shawn, jeanne
17:55:33 [jeanne]
present+
17:55:34 [jeanne]
zakim, clear agenda
17:55:34 [jeanne]
rrsagent, make minutes
17:55:34 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/16-silver-minutes.html jeanne
17:55:34 [jeanne]
q?
17:55:34 [Zakim]
agenda cleared
17:55:50 [jeanne]
q- Wilco
17:56:02 [Azlan]
present+
17:56:53 [jeanne]
agenda+ reminder of upcoming meetings
17:56:53 [jeanne]
agenda+ drafting responses to WCAG3 Issues
17:56:53 [jeanne]
agenda+ agenda and details on 29 April Joint AGWG - Silver meeting
17:56:53 [jeanne]
agenda+ Bronze Silver Gold options
17:57:02 [jeanne]
agenda+ reminder of survey
17:57:40 [jeanne]
agenda order is 1,5,2,3,4
17:58:56 [laura]
laura has joined #silver
17:59:01 [jennifer_strickland]
jennifer_strickland has joined #silver
17:59:05 [jennifer_strickland]
present+
17:59:23 [Chuck]
Chuck has joined #silver
17:59:46 [ChrisLoiselle]
present+
18:00:11 [PeterKorn]
PeterKorn has joined #silver
18:00:37 [JF]
JF has joined #silver
18:00:43 [Chuck]
agenda?
18:00:46 [JF]
Present +
18:00:49 [JF]
agenda?
18:00:51 [PeterKorn]
present+
18:00:57 [SuzanneTaylor]
SuzanneTaylor has joined #silver
18:02:01 [Lauriat]
Lauriat has joined #silver
18:02:04 [Lauriat]
Present+
18:03:19 [Francis_Storr]
Francis_Storr has joined #silver
18:03:24 [Francis_Storr]
present+
18:03:43 [Jemma]
Jemma has joined #silver
18:04:02 [Jemma]
present+
18:04:07 [sajkaj]
present+
18:04:11 [sajkaj]
scribe: sajkaj
18:05:05 [jennifer_strickland]
It's my first week at MITRE and my brain is kaput.
18:05:26 [SuzanneTaylor]
present+
18:05:28 [laura]
present+ Laura_Carlson
18:05:36 [sajkaj]
js: Put the 29th in your calendars! oAM, 1PM, and 5PM Boston!
18:05:40 [jeanne]
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Meetings/vFtF_2021
18:06:13 [AngelaAccessForAll]
AngelaAccessForAll has joined #silver
18:06:21 [Chuck]
janina: The new calendar tool from W3C may be useful now.
18:06:21 [AngelaAccessForAll]
present+
18:06:26 [Chuck]
janina: Live now.
18:06:34 [Jemma]
w3c calendar can also have a link to the minutes
18:06:48 [Jemma]
agenda?
18:06:52 [RickBoardman]
RickBoardman has joined #silver
18:06:57 [sajkaj]
zakim, next item
18:06:57 [Zakim]
agendum 1 -- reminder of upcoming meetings -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:07:24 [sajkaj]
zakim, close this item
18:07:24 [Zakim]
agendum 1 closed
18:07:25 [sajkaj]
zakim, next item
18:07:26 [Zakim]
I see 4 items remaining on the agenda; the next one is
18:07:26 [Zakim]
5. reminder of survey [from jeanne]
18:07:26 [Zakim]
agendum 5 -- reminder of survey -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:07:29 [jeanne]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-silver/2021Apr/0060.html
18:07:42 [jeanne]
https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag3-weekly-responses-survey/
18:07:46 [sajkaj]
js: A survey for us all
18:07:58 [sajkaj]
js: This is issue processing
18:08:24 [sajkaj]
ca: I created, and is next Tuesday's agenda, 20 April
18:08:46 [sajkaj]
ca: Link in first question that will pull up items with a draft response to consider in the telecon
18:09:14 [sajkaj]
ca: Request is to agree with all, or choose other and make a comment regarding your concerns or proposed changes
18:09:31 [sajkaj]
ca: Notes he's crafted the 4 in the current survey
18:10:18 [Azlan]
I cannot access the survey
18:10:20 [sajkaj]
js: Asks whether everyone can access the survey, especially people in via CG?
18:10:59 [jennifer_strickland]
Where is the survey, please?
18:11:29 [SuzanneTaylor]
I'm getting "Not Allowed"
18:11:32 [sajkaj]
ca: Also asks any CG people to check if can access ...
18:11:52 [sajkaj]
rick: Can access everything!
18:11:58 [Azlan]
Thank you
18:12:17 [sajkaj]
jennifer_strickland: Seeing the survey but no response options ...
18:12:29 [sajkaj]
ca: Do you see instructions in a link?
18:12:31 [sajkaj]
js: Yes
18:12:32 [PeterKorn]
q+
18:12:47 [sajkaj]
ca: So, one must use the link to go forward
18:13:06 [sajkaj]
ca: Either accept all, or make comment with specifics
18:13:25 [KimD]
KimD has joined #silver
18:13:33 [KimD]
present+
18:13:34 [Chuck]
ack Peter
18:13:47 [sajkaj]
pk: Looking at survey and IBM comments ...
18:14:01 [sajkaj]
pk: Is there plan to break up their doc like was done with ITI?
18:14:23 [sajkaj]
ca: Yes, this is just one item where we were able to get to a response already
18:14:30 [sajkaj]
ack pe
18:14:35 [sajkaj]
zakim, next item
18:14:35 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- drafting responses to WCAG3 Issues -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:15:29 [sajkaj]
zakim, take up item 3
18:15:29 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- agenda and details on 29 April Joint AGWG - Silver meeting -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:15:42 [JF_]
JF_ has joined #silver
18:15:54 [sajkaj]
js: Invites people to look at ...
18:16:07 [jeanne]
https://github.com/w3c/silver/labels/status%3A%20needs%20proposal
18:16:24 [sajkaj]
js: Current list of issues ready for a proposal response draft
18:16:35 [sajkaj]
s/proposal/proposed/
18:16:59 [sajkaj]
js: Recalls Alastair reviewed the process in some detail at our Tuesday AM call
18:17:20 [sajkaj]
js: Important that declining should include reasons
18:17:21 [Francis_Storr]
Francis_Storr has joined #silver
18:17:32 [sajkaj]
s/declining/declining to agree/
18:18:09 [sajkaj]
js: And always remember to be respectful and professional in our responses.
18:18:24 [sajkaj]
ca: Especially with persons outside W3C, but really always
18:18:46 [sajkaj]
js: Notes that Chuck has labeled his responses as "draft,"
18:18:56 [sajkaj]
ca: That's important and we should be sure to do that
18:19:30 [sajkaj]
js: Also, when begin working on a comment, remove label that says "needs proposal" and assign it to yourself.
18:19:45 [sajkaj]
js: If you run into a permissions issue, send your github nick to cooper@w3.org
18:19:52 [jeanne]
send requests for Github access to cooper@w3.org
18:20:30 [sajkaj]
js: Reason for removing "needs proposal" is to avoid more people taking up the same issue response draft with no coordination
18:21:07 [sajkaj]
js: Please keep looking at the "needs proposal" sort, and help us with proposal drafts. This will help immensly
18:21:30 [sajkaj]
js: This should also help support more asyncronous participation
18:21:47 [sajkaj]
zakim, take up item 4
18:21:47 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- Bronze Silver Gold options -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:21:58 [sajkaj]
agenda?
18:22:15 [sajkaj]
zakim, take up item 3
18:22:15 [Zakim]
agendum 3 -- agenda and details on 29 April Joint AGWG - Silver meeting -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:22:35 [Lauriat]
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Meetings/vFtF_2021
18:22:38 [sajkaj]
js: We have agenda for bronze/silver/gold meeting ...
18:23:23 [sajkaj]
js: We are taking comments assigned to editors relating to conformance and breaking it down for b/s/g discussion
18:23:41 [sajkaj]
js: we'll start with testing discussion
18:24:06 [sajkaj]
js: we will break this into topics athey'll be available in advance and will be posted in advance
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Session 1
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Context of meeting and short summary of AGWG and Silver Merge plans
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Testing comments and building blocks of testing
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Session 2
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Building blocks of scoring
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Session 3
18:25:40 [jeanne]
Requirements of what we want in Conformance and how to assess the proposals for Conformance
18:25:41 [jeanne]
Options of Bronze Silver Gold document
18:25:54 [Lauriat]
q?
18:26:00 [Jemma]
Q+
18:26:06 [sajkaj]
js: Notes it's all on the agenda page which will continue to get updates
18:26:09 [PeterKorn]
q+
18:26:38 [jeanne]
ack peter
18:26:55 [sajkaj]
pk: Double checking that BSG options is the Google doc with some low teens number of options?
18:26:58 [PeterKorn]
ack p
18:26:58 [sajkaj]
js: Yes!
18:27:07 [sajkaj]
js: We're up to 13!
18:27:10 [JF_]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjH_9iEr_JL8d7sE7BoQckmkpaDksKZiH7Q-RdDide4/edit#
18:27:29 [sajkaj]
Jemma: Sounds very good, but will be missing the sessions, trying to understand link between 1st and 2nd sessions ...
18:27:49 [Lauriat]
ack Jemma
18:28:03 [JustineP]
JustineP has joined #silver
18:28:23 [sajkaj]
js: Notes one may have different tests for html vs a mobile app
18:28:43 [sajkaj]
js: But once test is in hand one evaluates how one does passing the tests
18:29:02 [sajkaj]
js: At the outcome level you get a score number that is averaged from individual tests
18:29:15 [PeterKorn]
Dropping for my conflict...
18:29:27 [RickBoardman]
q+
18:29:40 [sajkaj]
js: Reason for extra scoring level is for the ability to make all scores averagable in a fair manner
18:30:24 [sajkaj]
js: Idea of outcome level is more related to outcome
18:30:58 [Lauriat]
ack RickBoardman
18:31:07 [sajkaj]
janina: Please re-explain!
18:31:20 [jeanne]
Testing happens at the technology level
18:31:26 [jeanne]
Scoring is at the Outcome level
18:31:32 [sajkaj]
rick: Yes, also not understanding yet, can we get one sentence summaries of the pieces? I could volunteer to work on that
18:31:52 [sajkaj]
js: We should re-examine the explanations that Rachael did
18:32:10 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#tests
18:32:52 [Lauriat]
Tests provide ways to check that methods and techniques have been followed. Tests include step-by-step instructions on evaluating the method based on the technology being used. Tests may vary by technology as needed. Tests specify the unit being tested and the approach to scoring for that test.
18:32:55 [sajkaj]
js: reads from link ...
18:32:56 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#test-scoring
18:33:06 [Lauriat]
Each method includes information on how to score individual instances of the test. The testing results for methods inform the rating of the related outcome.
18:33:27 [SuzanneTaylor]
https://w3c.github.io/silver/guidelines/#outcome-rating
18:33:39 [ChrisLoiselle]
https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#conformance-levels and https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#outcomes-structure
18:33:42 [sajkaj]
js: Recalls good example re XR
18:34:15 [jeanne]
https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0/#captions
18:35:06 [sajkaj]
js: Looking at speech and nonspeech audio ...
18:35:40 [sajkaj]
js: Run test at the tech level it's for, then a translation process level that brings into a rating that would be comparable to an unrelated guideline like plain lang
18:35:50 [JF_]
Q+
18:36:02 [Chuck]
janina: Rating/score might be a useful distinction to make
18:36:26 [sajkaj]
rick: Volunteers again to try and help make it a bit more newbie friendly
18:36:46 [sajkaj]
js: Accepts and will forward anything useful that comes up
18:36:46 [Lauriat]
+1, thank you, Rick!
18:36:47 [jeanne]
ack JF
18:37:24 [sajkaj]
jf: Is this good time to dive into scoring details?
18:37:30 [sajkaj]
js: No, not just now
18:37:48 [sajkaj]
zakim, next item
18:37:48 [Zakim]
agendum 2 -- drafting responses to WCAG3 Issues -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:38:02 [sajkaj]
agenda?
18:38:11 [sajkaj]
zakim, close this item
18:38:11 [Zakim]
agendum 2 closed
18:38:12 [Zakim]
I see 1 item remaining on the agenda:
18:38:12 [Zakim]
4. Bronze Silver Gold options [from jeanne]
18:38:14 [sajkaj]
zakim, next item
18:38:14 [Zakim]
agendum 4 -- Bronze Silver Gold options -- taken up [from jeanne]
18:38:14 [jeanne]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjH_9iEr_JL8d7sE7BoQckmkpaDksKZiH7Q-RdDide4/
18:39:02 [sajkaj]
js: Asks SL to lead discussion ... Are there ones we haven't yet reveiwed
18:39:05 [sajkaj]
sl: I believe 3 to go
18:39:18 [sajkaj]
sl: Believe we stopped at 11
18:39:27 [sajkaj]
sl: So maybe 2
18:39:40 [sajkaj]
topic: Option #12
18:39:48 [Lauriat]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BjH_9iEr_JL8d7sE7BoQckmkpaDksKZiH7Q-RdDide4/edit#heading=h.juk4rs86lt47
18:40:05 [ChrisLoiselle]
I can do it
18:40:22 [sajkaj]
js: Believe it came from PK
18:40:37 [sajkaj]
sl: Ah, yes and we wanted to review with him present ...
18:40:43 [sajkaj]
js: Postpone?
18:40:48 [sajkaj]
sl: Let's start with 13
18:40:54 [sajkaj]
TOPIC: Option #13
18:41:16 [sajkaj]
sl: Makato did walk us through the results so we've had a start
18:41:19 [ChrisLoiselle]
Option 13 it is. Option 13 from Results of the Attendees Survey - Japanese Webinar on FPWD
18:41:32 [sajkaj]
sl: This was outcome from a Japanese conversation Makato translated into English for us
18:41:36 [ChrisLoiselle]
WCAG 2.x Level AA too difficult, prefer something more like - A → Bronze AA → Silver [something higher] → Gold
18:41:54 [sajkaj]
sl: Suggesting Level A approx = to Bronze
18:42:13 [sajkaj]
sl: Then items in AA would be Silver; and a higher standard Gold
18:42:18 [Lauriat]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kX6DnXftI9VSrK9wgTTOqlkFp9KE4OCGxQqgDiAUcTc/edit#heading=h.fc4xg3cwwi2o
18:43:12 [sajkaj]
sl: One pro is that AA is too hard to meet in Japan
18:43:24 [sajkaj]
sl: Hoping for a more feasible standard
18:43:37 [sajkaj]
sl: But why would be a question we woult to have an answer for
18:43:45 [jeanne]
q+ to say that this could be addressed by changing minimum score for bronze
18:43:46 [sajkaj]
sl: Some cons ...
18:43:54 [sajkaj]
sl: Fairness with categories unaddressed
18:44:06 [sajkaj]
sl: Could be addressed by reducing minimum scoring for Bronze
18:44:12 [Lauriat]
ack jeanne
18:44:12 [Zakim]
jeanne, you wanted to say that this could be addressed by changing minimum score for bronze
18:44:44 [sajkaj]
js: There has been conversation whether 3.5 is the correct number for achieving Bronze
18:45:00 [sajkaj]
js: It was arbitrary at first, and intended to get the conversation going
18:45:13 [sajkaj]
js: Subgroups weren't necessarily consistent
18:45:31 [sajkaj]
js: Some groups included AAA at 4; others addressed AA at 4
18:45:49 [sajkaj]
js: Mainly because we ran out of time for publication
18:46:02 [sajkaj]
s/publication/publication deadline/
18:46:33 [sajkaj]
js: We have discussed in discussing how to handle AAA; one outcome was to reduce the score--phps 2.5
18:46:55 [sajkaj]
js: That would support AAA at 4 at outcome
18:47:16 [sajkaj]
js: Theoretically we could also address some of the Japanese concerns that way
18:47:33 [sajkaj]
js: Thought it doesn't address Bronze = A
18:48:11 [sajkaj]
sl: Moved could be addressed to 'issue to work through'
18:48:27 [sajkaj]
sl: and we need to know why AA is to hard in Japan, so we can solve the right problem
18:49:10 [ChrisLoiselle]
for Option 13 : Issues to Work Through - Could be addressed with the FPWD by reducing the minimum point score for Bronze. - Identify the barriers that some geographies have in implementing WCAG - AA - Needs looking more into what makes WCAG 2.x AA too difficult to meet
18:49:32 [Chuck]
janina: Was it because they were not able to get a translation of the spec? Couldn't get ARIA into japanese? that might find a sponsor to resolve.
18:49:35 [ChrisLoiselle]
Janina: Screen readers not translating to Japanese and not knowing what to do? Was that topic part of this?
18:49:41 [Chuck]
jeanne: That's on the "accessibility supported" conversation.
18:49:52 [Chuck]
jeanne: A good question we need to get to, but not today.
18:50:28 [sajkaj]
sl: Looks more an overall complexity of getting to AA -- can't tell exactly why? Alkl or nothing? In which case not a problem as long as scoring takes that into account
18:50:38 [sajkaj]
sl: We'll work with Makato to understand this better
18:51:06 [sajkaj]
Jemma: Recall because hard to understand as written
18:51:39 [sajkaj]
sl: So we may already be making good progress on this, but we'll double check the details
18:52:05 [Chuck]
q+
18:52:10 [sajkaj]
azlan: The difficulty is from the engineering point of view, correct?
18:52:27 [sajkaj]
azlan: Are the outcomes difficult? Isn't that what matters?
18:52:36 [jeanne]
+1
18:52:42 [sajkaj]
sl: +1
18:52:42 [Lauriat]
ack Chuck
18:52:54 [sajkaj]
ca: Not so sure the survey was engineering based
18:53:02 [Jemma]
yes, they are accessibility evaluators
18:53:03 [JF_]
Q+ to note its not always about AT
18:53:16 [Jemma]
in Japan
18:53:23 [sajkaj]
sl: A reason to dig deeper--to avoid making assumptions on the why
18:53:31 [Lauriat]
ack JF_
18:53:31 [Zakim]
JF_, you wanted to note its not always about AT
18:53:51 [sajkaj]
jf: Notes not always about AT; some things don't require AT e.g. captions
18:54:46 [Chuck]
+5
18:55:16 [KimD]
KimD has left #silver
18:55:31 [sajkaj]
zakim, bye
18:55:31 [Zakim]
leaving. As of this point the attendees have been jeanne, Azlan, jennifer_strickland, ChrisLoiselle, PeterKorn, Lauriat, Francis_Storr, Jemma, sajkaj, SuzanneTaylor,
18:55:31 [Zakim]
Zakim has left #silver
18:55:34 [Zakim]
... Laura_Carlson, AngelaAccessForAll, KimD
18:55:35 [sajkaj]
rrsagent, make minutes
18:55:35 [RRSAgent]
I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/04/16-silver-minutes.html sajkaj
18:55:40 [Azlan]
Azlan has left #silver
19:14:42 [sajkaj]
sajkaj has left #silver
19:16:29 [laura]
laura has joined #silver
20:52:31 [johnkirkwood]
johnkirkwood has joined #Silver